Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

OKIsItJustMe

(21,775 posts)
15. Right. My point here is that I don’t think it’s an S -vs- N thing at all
Thu Jun 18, 2015, 06:00 PM
Jun 2015

The nice graphs of who follows a web site like “Do The Math” do not indicate who is interested in climate change. They may indicate who is interested in reading a blog which “is often playfully quantitative” when dealing with “societal issues relating to energy production, climate change, and economic growth,” (know their Myers-Briggs type, and will share it with strangers.) For the majority, that phrase, “playfully quantitative” is the worst kind of oxymoron.

That does not mean the majority are “programmed to ignore” “climate change.”

The majority of Americans believe that the climate is changing.
A similar majority believe that climate change will harm future generations.
A smaller majority (but a majority) of Americans are worried about climate change.
A minority believe that the climate is changing because of human activities.
http://environment.yale.edu/poe/v2014

There is a minority who do not believe the climate is changing at all. They are not swayed by science, nor are they swayed by the evidence of their own experience. Trying to convince them otherwise is like trying to teach a pig to sing.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

For whatever their reasons, their brains are almost totally shutdown. nt ladjf Jun 2015 #1
N-type here. Maybe this will influence some... Ghost Dog Jun 2015 #2
"presenting them with data they can't process... Duppers Jun 2015 #3
This is then where everything breaks down The2ndWheel Jun 2015 #5
Science suggests the opposite OKIsItJustMe Jun 2015 #8
...when political passions come into play. Duppers Jun 2015 #18
Accountants, lawyers and Doctors are TRAINED to be that way happyslug Jun 2015 #21
there is another type -- those who deny professionally GreatGazoo Jun 2015 #4
two categories of psychological wiring PADemD Jun 2015 #6
I think “confirmation bias” goes a long way… OKIsItJustMe Jun 2015 #7
Practices like "fake balance" play into peoples' psychological predispositions. GliderGuider Jun 2015 #10
You may misunderstand “S types” OKIsItJustMe Jun 2015 #11
How so? GliderGuider Jun 2015 #12
“S types … innate tendency to trust what's in front of them.” OKIsItJustMe Jun 2015 #13
ergo why I used the word "tendency". GliderGuider Jun 2015 #14
Right. My point here is that I don’t think it’s an S -vs- N thing at all OKIsItJustMe Jun 2015 #15
OK, and I think S/N plays a significant role. GliderGuider Jun 2015 #16
It may play a role OKIsItJustMe Jun 2015 #17
Deniers are 'practical' people pscot Jun 2015 #9
The irony here is amusing LouisvilleDem Jun 2015 #19
GG; I'm afraid I couldn't disagree more with your statement: "As far as I can tell, most scientists Bill USA Jun 2015 #20
I have no problem with your disagreement GliderGuider Jun 2015 #22
are you referring to Myers-Briggs Type Indicator? Bill USA Jun 2015 #23
I come from a hard-science family GliderGuider Jun 2015 #24
You need both LouisvilleDem Jul 2015 #25
never said there was no intuition involved in conduct of scientific discovery. Without that you'd Bill USA Jul 2015 #27
And I was just talking about the MBTI. GliderGuider Jul 2015 #28
I do not understand it.. its the one thing that drives me nutsy Peacetrain Jul 2015 #26
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»Why it's so hard to convi...»Reply #15